Back   OpEd News
Font
PageWidth
Original Content at
https://www.opednews.com/articles/Should-Clinton-Withdraw-he-by-carol-wolman-MD-Hillary-Clinton-Emails-And-Server_Intelligence_Investigation_President-160528-364.html
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

May 28, 2016

Should Clinton Withdraw her Candidacy?

By carol wolman, MD

"Those damn emails" are damning Hillary more and more. This article quotes several sources, including right-wing blogs,about the investigation and possible consequences, and suggests she withdraw from the presidential race.

::::::::

The investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while Secretary of State is intensifying. Questions are arising about whether she broke the law, committed a felony, and/or jeopardized national security in a way that facilitated the killing of Libyan Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi in 2012. People are wondering if she should withdraw her candidacy for president now, before the Democratic Convention in July.

Should she be nominated prior to the conclusion of the investigation, then it could happen that the Democratic candidate for president is found unfit for the office. If so, her candidacy will be in serious trouble, and her opponent, almost certainly Donald Trump, will have a much better chance of winning.

Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump - Caricatures
Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump - Caricatures
(Image by DonkeyHotey)
  Details   DMCA

A group of U.S. intelligence veterans is calling on President Obama to expedite the FBI review of former Secretary of State Clinton's alleged email security violations so the public can assess this issue in a timely fashion.

"If you choose, instead, to give precedence to politics over national security, the American people will be deprived of timely appreciation of the gravity of the harm done; national security officials who do follow the rules will be scandalized; FBI investigators will conclude that that their job is more political than professional; and the noxious impression will grow that powerful people cannot be held accountable when they break the law." "

These officers point out:

"'Anyone who has ever handled classified material knows that there are a number of things that you do not do. You do not take it home with you, you do not copy it and share it with anyone who does not have a clearance and a need-to-know, you do not strip off the classification marks and treat it as unclassified, and you do not transfer it to another email account that is not protected by a government server""http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/05/24/intel-vets-urge-fast-report-clintons-emails

Today, May 28th, an article in The Hill reports:

"A scathing inspector general's report this week was just the first in what is likely to be a series of official actions related to (Clinton's) private server stemming from the FBI, a federal courthouse and Capitol Hill"

The State Department's watchdog report was especially damaging, given the official nature of its source. The report claimed that Clinton never sought approval for her "homebrew" email setup, that her use of the system violated the department's record-keeping rules and that it would have been rejected had she brought it up to department officials"

..What is potentially profoundly more damaging for Clinton is the looming FBI investigation, exploring the possibility that she or her aides mishandled classified information.

More than 2,000 emails that Clinton gave the State Department from her private server have been classified at some level, and 22 were marked as "top secret" -- the highest level of classification -- and deemed too dangerous to release publicly even in a highly redacted form. However, none of the emails were marked as classified at the time they were sent, complicating the investigation into whether her setup thwarted any laws"

..Republicans appear primed to cry foul if the FBI closes its investigation without handing down indictments or offering a public explanation. Senior lawmakers have already excoriated the Justice Department for failing to appoint a special prosecutor. "http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/281554-clinton-email-headache-is-about-to-get-worse

Meanwhile, fodder is being provided for the Trump attack. Here are some items that have been circulating through right wing blogs for several years:

1. Months before the 2012 Benghazi attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, the U.S. State Department had at least three detailed intelligence reports warning of al-Qaida's build-up in Benghazi and quoting a militant leader who vowed to kill the U.S. ambassador, according to a new book chronicling the heroism of Navy SEALs. http://www.wnd.com/2014/03/benghazi-bombshell-al-qaida-vowed-to-kill-ambassador/

2. In the year prior to the deadly 2012 Benghazi attack, Hillary Clinton used her private email server to correspond about such highly sensitive national security matters as specific threats to the Libya hotel where Ambassador Chris Stevens was staying as well as his decision to remain at the hotel despite the threats.

The emails, released May 22 by the State Department, also contained the exact movements of Stevens while he was stationed in arguably one of the most dangerous zones in the world for any American diplomat, a WND review has found.http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/hillary-tipped-murdered-ambassadors-movements-in-emails/

3. Fox News military analyst Colonel David Hunt"stated that the decision not to staff Benghazi with Marines was made by Secretary of State Clinton when she attached her signature to the State Department Rules of Engagement for Libya document. Breitbart News has subsequently learned that under those rules of engagement, Secretary Clinton prohibited Marines from providing security at any American diplomatic installation in Libya". Colonel Hunt also said, "The American mission at Benghazi was like a cardboard building, there wasn't even bullet proof glass." In addition, Hunt said the security guards inside the mission didn't have bullets. http://www.barenakedislam.com/2012/09/15/did-hillary-clinton-kill-ambassador-christopher-stevens/

4. Greg Hicks, the State Department's lead diplomat in Tripoli that night, said he repeatedly asked for military help, but was denied. The administration insisted no assets were stopped; but no military help was available.

But the leader of a U.S. quick response anti-terrorism team said his unit was stopped after they prepared to deploy; a small U.S. special forces team in Tripoli was stopped from boarding a flight to Benghazi to help while the attacks were underway; and three U.S. security officers stationed nearby said their CIA boss delayed them from responding quickly to help. http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/lanny-davis-no-stand-down-order-at-benghazi/

The implication of these right wing blogs is that Hillary was either very stupid about security, or else actively colluded with the attacks, perhaps in order to justify a military intervention in Libya. Either one would disqualify her for president.

As many have pointed out, she IS experienced, but her record shows poor judgment and decision -- making. She might spare herself and the American people a lot of agony if she withdrew from the presidential race now.



Authors Website: http://www.paracove.com

Authors Bio:

Carol S. Wolman, MD is a psychiatrist in Northern California. A lifelong peace activist, she is helping to distribute a Peace Plan for the Holy Land- email her for a copy. She also a film producer with Paradise Cove Productions, currently producing HOTEL REFINEMENT- a feature film noir with a subtheme about torture, Guantanamo, and killing Arabs.


Back